Tag: perpetual war

The American Way of War, War, War

That title of mine is certainly repetitive of me (me, me), but how can you not be repetitive in the distinctly repeated world of Donald J. Trump (Trumped, Trumped)? I mean, twice already and who really knows what’s to come?

Here’s the question nobody seems to be asking right now, though: What country will Donald Trump attack next? Yes, at the moment, he’s still wildly wound up in his Iran war/truce/peace/or you name it (tomorrow). Yesterday, it was, of course, Venezuela, and next week it might be Cuba or Greenland, or who on (or off) this planet knows where? And I haven’t even mentioned his military’s ongoing bombing runs in Somalia, which are barely noticed in the mainstream media here. And who knows what I’ve forgotten or what to expect in this increasingly bizarre world of ours from the president who swore repeatedly in his third election campaign that he would never, never, never go to… yes, of course, war?

Hey, only the other day, Secretary of War (a title which, of course, couldn’t be blunter in the age of You Know Who) Pete Hegseth warned that “what happens with the future of Cuba is in the hands of the president of the United States and the leadership of Cuba. No matter what, the Department of War is going to be prepared and postured for any possible contingency.”

Ah, yes, any possible contingency except one, of course: victory (which, since the Second World War, just hasn’t been in the American vocabulary) or, for that matter, peace. I mean what could possibly go wrong in a world that now, remarkably enough, has its first trillionaire, Donald Trump’s (sometimes) buddy Elon Musk? (On that, Senator Elizabeth Warren commented all too aptly: “I want to be clear: This is not just some fluke. It is a feature of a rigged economy.”)

What, in fact, could possibly go wrong on such a rigged planet? I’m sure Donald Trump and Elon Musk couldn’t imagine. What could go wrong on a world in which no American president ever seems to realize that wars are simply never to be won by this country, no matter its power and the ever-ballooning size of the Pentagon budget, now possibly heading for – ah, yes, talking about trillionaires! – $1.5 trillion yearly (and, no, that is not a typo), if Donald Trump has anything to say about it? And in Congress, mind you, that’s still referred to as “defense” spending.

Keep reading

Netanyahu Cannot Have a Veto Over US Iran Diplomacy

On June 23, Israeli and Lebanese delegations began a new round of talks in Washington even as the U.S.-Iran memorandum entered its first serious test. The interim deal, signed on June 17, was meant to create 60 days of space for a final settlement: a halt in hostilities, a path toward safer navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, limited sanctions relief, and negotiations over the nuclear file. But the deal is now being tested by the very question it was supposed to contain. Can the United States pursue diplomacy with Iran while Israel insists that it must retain unrestricted freedom of military action in Lebanon?

That question should not be evaded. Israel has real security concerns about Iran’s nuclear capacity, its missile program, and the armed groups Tehran supports across the region. Israelis living near the Lebanese border have endured rocket fire and the threat of renewed war. A rushed agreement that merely freezes danger while leaving the machinery of escalation intact would not deserve American support. But serious security concerns do not create a right to veto another country’s diplomacy. They create a case for stronger verification, clearer consequences for violations, and more durable regional arrangements.

The June 17 memorandum is not a finished peace agreement. It is a fragile framework. Its text leaves the hardest questions for the next 60 days: the status of Iran’s enriched uranium, the future of enrichment, sanctions schedules, inspection arrangements, and the mechanisms that would enforce compliance. The United States has since issued a temporary sanctions waiver, while public statements from Washington and Tehran have already diverged over whether Iran agreed to long-term nuclear inspections. Those gaps are not a reason to abandon diplomacy. They are the reason diplomacy must be exacting.

This is where Netanyahu’s position matters. Israel is not a signatory to the U.S.-Iran memorandum, and it is entitled to press its case in Washington. Yet Netanyahu has repeatedly argued that Israeli forces must preserve freedom of action against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, even as the ceasefire there remains part of the wider regional de-escalation effort. That posture turns a legitimate debate over security into something more consequential: an assertion that any agreement limiting Israeli military discretion is, by definition, unacceptable.

The distinction is not semantic. Israel can demand that a final agreement address missile threats, weapons transfers, Hezbollah’s arsenal, and enforceable nuclear restrictions. It can seek rapid intelligence-sharing, inspection standards, and clear American commitments if Iran violates a deal. What it should not demand is a regional order built around the premise that Washington must keep military escalation available whenever Israeli leaders decide diplomacy has become too constraining. A security strategy can seek tougher terms without requiring permanent crisis as its operating condition.

Keep reading

Even BBC, The British Intelligence Mouthpiece, Now Admits Russia Is Winning In Donbass And The End Is Near

Tsarizm wrote last week that the end was near in Donbass as Russian forces now controlled key gateways to the region and stood on the brink of achieving their goal of forcing Ukrainian forces out of the area.

Now, as the end approaches, the British mouthpiece of MI-6, the BBC, confirms the situation in a remarkable admission.

Russian troops have infiltrated the strategic city of Kostyantynivka in eastern Ukraine and are now trying to surround it.

The entire city is now effectively in a “grey zone”, no longer controlled by anyone, Ukrainian soldiers have told the BBC.

“They get into areas behind our backs and in urban conditions it’s extremely difficult to push them out,” says a Ukrainian drone pilot who operates in that area and prefers to remain anonymous.

Kostyantynivka is a gateway to the rest of the Donbas region.

If it falls, Russian forces would be able push towards Ukraine’s last remaining strongholds in the east, the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, and move closer to seizing Donbas completely, one of the Kremlin’s key objectives in this war.

We wrote recently — What Zelenskiy is not telling the world is that the city of Kostiantynivka in Donbass has recently fallen under the Russian advance. Russian forces are now focusing on Sloviansk, which once taken, will open the door to Kramatorsk in one or two months.

A situation is developing where a massive cauldron is forming, encircling thousands of Ukrainian troops and the Zelenskiy government will not order the withdrawal to save the soldiers.

“It is a deliberate slaughter of Ukrainian soldiers,” said a source in Kyiv. “It is intentionally losing a division.”

The realization of the situation on the ground explains the increase in long-range attacks on Russian energy infrastructure, the threats against Belarus and Poland, and the saber rattling by the EU.

It’s time to end the war, as Russian President Putin today offered negotiations with Kyiv. The Kremlin understands the situation on the ground as well.

Putin commented, “A coup d’état was carried out in Ukraine. The regime was brought to power that was crazy, anti-Russian.

“They were the ones who started the hostilities in Donbas. They used aviation, they used tanks, artillery, and so on, practically against the civilian population.

“For eight years, we endured, we tried to reach an agreement with them in every way. Then they announced that they would not reach an agreement by peaceful means.

“Well, we were forced to stand up for the protection of the people who live there.”

In our view, it’s time to end the war and prevent a much larger conflagration on The Continent, that the globalist EU leadership is pushing for.

Keep reading

Sheer Madness: UK Tests Long-Range Missile For Ukraine To Bomb Moscow – The US Needs To Pull Out Of NATO Immediately

Ukraine is making it clear they are seeking to “bring the war to Russia” – and this is what’s behind the recent series of massive Ukrainian drone strikes on Moscow, which has wreaked havoc particularly on energy refineries, and air travel for the region. That Ukraine desperately wants to gain back what leverage they are able to is fully understandable, however, that NATO is backing such actions against a nuclear-armed superpower constitutes madness. 

Aside from covert targeting assistance, the UK is taking things in a more overt direction, having reportedly just tested missiles with a range of 300 miles which is intended to be sent to Ukraine’s military. 

The British missile platform has the capability of delivering 500-pound warhead to Moscow.

The Telegraph offers some further details regarding context to the major Ukraine support program in the following:

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) challenged firms to build long-range strike weapons that can fly at more than 370mph, cost about £400,000 each and can be built at a pace of 20 a month.

Some 27 bids from industry were made with Dragon’s Den-style pitches held last February, before six UK companies were awarded contracts worth around £5m each to design prototypes for testing in just seven months.

By last December, only three suppliers remained: MBDA UK, which makes the Storm Shadow stealth missile, MGI Engineering, a UK small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) with a background in Formula 1 technology, and Rotron Aerospace, another UK SME with a history of working with the MoD.

And the publication confirms that “New systems that can attack targets more than 300 miles away have been tested at a range in the Hebrides, with further trials taking place in the UK over the coming months.”

For missiles of this range and power, this is a relatively cheap price tag, and can apparently be rapid-produced at that.

UK Armed Forces Minister Louise Sandher-Jones has said the new missiles are intended to “complement” the Storm Shadow cruise missiles London sends to Ukraine.

“The UK stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Ukraine, and we will continue to provide the support it needs to defend itself against Russian aggression,” she stated. “Project Brakestop shows what happens when we combine that commitment with the talent and ingenuity of British industry.”

Keep reading

Israel continues to commit genocide by targeting children in Gaza, UN inquiry finds

Israel continues to commit genocide by deliberately targeting Palestinian children in Gaza, an ⁠independent UN inquiry has found.

The report by the UN independent international commission of inquiry examined violations against Palestinian children since the start of the war in Gaza, and said about 30% of the people killed by Israeli forces have been children.

A previous report by the commission in September found that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza and that Israeli officials, including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, incited these acts. Netanyahu is separately wanted by the international criminal court (ICC) for war crimes.

The Israeli mission in Geneva said Israel rejected the commission’s “libellous sham”. Israel has fought hard against allegations of genocide, while receiving critical diplomatic support from its allies, including the US and the UK.

A significant body of research by legal and rights experts has concluded that Israel is intent on destroying Palestinians, including analyses by UN investigators, rights bodies such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and genocide scholars worldwide.

Genocide, which became a crime after the second world war and the Holocaust, is considered the most serious international crime.

Keep reading

Senate Approves House-Passed War Powers Resolution to Limit Trump’s Action in Iran – Four Republicans Join the Democrats

The Senate on Tuesday approved a House-passed war powers resolution to limit Trump’s action in Iran in a 50 to 48 vote.

Four Republicans joined the Democrats: Rand Paul (KY), Bill Cassidy (LA), Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK).

Two Republican Senators – Mitch McConnell and David McCormick missed the vote.

McConnell’s office on Monday said that the Kentucky Senator will not be voting all week after his latest hospitalization.

Democrat Senator John Fetterman voted with the Republicans.

Tuesday’s vote marks the first time the Senate has passed the Iran war powers resolution.

Last month, the Senate advanced the resolution to limit President Trump’s war powers in Iran, marking a breakthrough for Democrats after seven failed attempts.

The House passed the war powers resolution earlier this month in a 215-208 vote.

The Hill reported:

The Senate on Tuesday approved a House-passed resolution directing President Trump to withdraw U.S. armed forces from hostilities against Iran after four GOP senators broke ranks and voted to undercut Trump’s authority as commander-in-chief.

The Senate voted 50 to 48 to approve the resolution, which passed the House 215-208 earlier this month.

The measure came straight to the Senate floor Tuesday for an up-or-down vote on final passage. It does not need Trump’s signature because it is a concurrent resolution.

But it does not have the force of law, even though it’s been approved by both chambers.

It directs Trump under the 1973 War Powers Act to remove U.S. troops from hostilities against Iran except for elements of the armed forces that would be necessary to protect U.S. assets or allies from imminent attack.

Keep reading

Trump and the Iran Deal – Another Programmed Deception

“Trump made a deal out of “desperation.”” —Iranian Supreme Leader

Did President Trump really make a deal or rather betray the public at large again – for the umpteenth time? Such treason is only possible because nobody reads the details. He knows it. The mainstream knows it. The Big Shot politicians know it.

The deliberate confusion on where to sign the “Deal,” first Geneva, then at Macron’s insistence in Evian where the G7 met (15-17 June 2026), then on the Swiss Buergenstock mountain (where the absurd May 2024 Ukrainian Peace Talk, without Russian presence, took place, and where the Bilderbergers often meet); and finally signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), not a Peace Treaty at all, on 17 June, finalized on 18 June 2026, in Versailles, near Paris.

Macron, with an “as-low-as-it-gets” popularity rating, wanted to have a role in the deal to boost his ego and approval rating, without considering Versailles’ questionable past, that may be haunting this deal as well, like many others before.

The city of Versailles is controversial for many reasons, not least the various poison scandals of the late 17th and 18th century, but the most controversial treaty signed after World War I, is the Treaty of Versailles (1919) itself, with its infamous Article 231, the peace treaty, also called the “Guilt Treaty,” attributing all responsibility for WWI to Germany. The Treaty (article 231) at the time ended the war between Germany and the Allied Powers. But did it really?

The Treaty was disliked by almost every country that signed it and is widely viewed as a major factor that paved the way for WWII. It was signed on June 28, 1919, in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles, and came into force on January 10, 1920.

Macron must know this. It is a bad omen for any new “Peace Treaty” – or MoU that intends to become a Peace Treaty.

Let us look at some details. The MoU, signed on 17 June 2026 at Versailles, was reported as a 14-point framework aimed at ending the war between the United States and Iran.

Keep reading

Senate passes ‘meaningless’ Iran resolution as Trump closes in on lasting peace deal

The Senate has approved a House-passed resolution directing President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from hostilities in Iran as the White House works to negotiate a lasting settlement with Tehran.

On Tuesday, the Senate voted 50 to 48 to approve the resolution, which cleared the House in a 215-208 vote a day prior. The measure directs Washington to remove U.S. armed forces from the country unless Congress authorizes further military action, as under the 1973 War Powers Act.

Since the resolution is a “concurrent resolution” it does not pass through the president’s desk for approval and carries disputed legal force. It does not have the force of law, however, despite the approval from both chambers.

The Act states that the U.S. Commander-in-Chief must alert Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops into hostilities. Once the notification is submitted, a 60-day period begins, during which the president must terminate the use of force.

Members of the Trump administration, however, clarified that the operation against Iran was already considered terminated as of the ceasefire agreement established by President Trump on April 7th.

Four Republicans voted for the measure: Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.).

The same four GOP senators voted last week in an effort to discharge a similar resolution from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee but it failed to advance due to attendance issues from Democrat members.

Notably, two GOP senators missed the vote: Senator Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Both senators had previously voted multiple times against Iran powers resolutions.

Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) voted “no” on Tuesday after alleging that he was open to hearing arguments from both sides of the debate. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the only Democrat member to join the majority of Republicans in voting against the measure.

Keep reading

When Military Fellows Replace Hill Staff

The pattern is obvious. In an overworked House office, whoever has time and capacity to produce a clean draft often decides what gets written. On defense portfolios, that is increasingly a uniformed fellow on detail from the Department of Defense. In practice, executive-branch detailees do not supplement staff capacity; they replace it on key tasks, shaping agendas, drafting text, and gatekeeping information that will later govern their own departments.

About ninety military fellows cycle through the Hill each year, with roughly two dozen each from the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and a dozen more from the Marine Corps. Their credentials are strong and intentions usually public-spirited. The problem is institutional. A congressional staffer owes undivided loyalty to Article I. An officer owes loyalty to a chain of command that runs to Article II. When workloads are crushing, that conflict is resolved by inertia rather than deliberation. The fellow who can deliver tonight becomes the author of governing text tomorrow. It is a story of structural capture by convenience.

Over 60 years ago, in his farewell speech, President Eisenhower warned us that “[i]n the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning rings truer than ever in 2026.

The consequences show up at every stage of the legislative cycle. On agenda setting, the person who can assemble a background memo first defines what “the options” are and which studies count as credible. On drafting, the earliest pass at bill or report language anchors debate. Overworked offices edit at the margins rather than reopen baseline assumptions. On oversight, the same fellow who helps frame hearing questions may later return to the department whose programs those questions were meant to scrutinize. Even the most ethical detailee will struggle to elevate uncomfortable data from inside the building where they will soon work again. In practice, the executive’s representative becomes the de facto author of legislative text that will govern the executive.

Defenders of the model claim Congress cannot meet deadlines without fellows. That is an indictment of congressional resourcing, not a defense of blurred powers. Speed at the price of independence is not a neutral trade. Second, they say members direct fellows’ work, so the institution remains in control. Direction is not authorship. When staff are underwater, authorship migrates to the person with time, not the person with authority.

There is also a practical equity problem. In many House offices the fellow becomes the defense staffer by default. That is replacement, not augmentation. Civilian staff lose chances to develop subject matter expertise, and offices become dependent on a pipeline they do not control. When the fellow rotates out, the capacity gap reopens. The department’s institutional memory remains intact. The House’s does not.

Keep reading

Half Of Crimea Goes Dark After Ukrainian Strike Hits Thermal Power Plant

Yet more drone attacks sent by Ukraine’s military has crippled much of the infrastructure of the Crimean peninsula. Reuters is confirming significant power outages, while some regional reports say as much as half of all Crimea is without power Tuesday.

One of the regional publications specified that “Yevpatoria, Saki, Krasnoperekopsk, Dzhankoy, and surrounding areas were left without electricity, reports the Ukrainian service of Radio Svoboda.”

“Preliminary, electricity supply is planned to be restored within 24 hours” – after several facilities in Crimea suffered direct hits by inbound drones. Fires have been witnessed at at railway and military facilities. Importantly, a large fire is being reported at a thermal power plant in Kerch, which left the greatest impact in terms of the widespread regional blackout:

Telegram channel “Crimean Wind” has written, “The CHP plant fire in Kerch is confirmed; the fire spread to a reservoir. The monitoring group, relying on satellite imagery, records a smoke plume about 47 kilometers long.”

According to more: “A strike on an oil depot, a TPP-Terminal, port infrastructure, and facilities in the area of Henichesk and the Arabat Spit is also reported.”

It was only two days ago, on June 21, that an oil depot in the Crimean city of Kerch was attacked, it is reportedly still burning, with reports of fires at the sprawling terminal complex’s Kavkaz port.

Life for millions in Crimea is already seriously strained, after those prior Sunday attacks resulted in the most severe fuel restrictions imposed on the population since the war began over four years ago.

Crimean Governor Sergey Aksyonov had previously confirmed the fuel crisis for the whole region, saying, “Today, June 21, starting from 09:00 am, fuel sales at Crimean petrol stations have been suspended” – though he added that fuel would only be sold to state enterprises.

He made clear in a Telegram post that starting Sunday morning local time gas stations across the peninsula would stop selling fuel to individuals and businesses. All cash, card and fuel coupons were immediately halted.

Relentless, nightly drone attacks making life harder on common Russians – in tandem to the Ukrainian population also having suffered immensely under Russia’s bombs and drones…

Keep reading